During a criminal jury trial, the Crown sought to put prior testimony from a previous trial to a witness during re‑examination.
Defence counsel had suggested in cross‑examination that the witness’s account evolved after discussions with others following the complainant’s death.
The court considered whether the cross‑examination raised an allegation of recent fabrication that would permit the Crown to introduce prior consistent testimony.
Applying the principles discussed in R. v. Ellard, the court found it was unclear that the prior testimony pre‑dated the alleged point of fabrication.
The Crown was therefore not permitted to put the testimony from the first trial to the witness, though re‑examination on the witness’s January testimony was allowed.
